ILNews

Workers’ comp, JTAC bills pass full Senate

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Legislation out of the House of Representatives reconfiguring workers’ compensation in Indiana passed the Senate Wednesday and goes back to the House with some changes.

House Bill 1320 increases nonmedical workers’ compensation caps to $390,000 per injury for injuries happening after July 1, 2014. It also increases the average weekly wage used to calculate compensation for nonmedical temporary partial or total disability, and for total permanent disability; on or after July 1, 2014, the average weekly wage used will be $1,170. That’s a $195 increase over the wage used for injuries that would occur today.

The bill also makes changes to payment rates as compared to Medicare. The legislation passed the Senate 43-7.

The Judicial Technology and Automation bill, HB 1393, passed the Senate 50-0. The bill establishes a judicial technology oversight committee, requires the Division of State Court Administration to develop and implement a standard protocol for sending and receiving court data by the end of the year, and increases the automated record keeping fee by $2 for two years, among other things. HB 1393 returns to the House with amendments.

The Senate also passed HB 1482 by a vote of 39-11. The bill allows a court to expunge records concerning misdemeanor convictions and minor Class D felony convictions under certain circumstances, and it gives judges discretion concerning some more serious felony convictions. The bill returns to the House with amendments.

On Thursday, the Senate concurred with House amendments to SB 125. The bill, which creates a commission on improving the status of children, a Department of Child Services oversight committee, and establishes a local child fatality review team in each county and a statewide child fatality review committee, passed 48-1 and is ready for enrollment. The introduced version of the bill was prepared by the Department of Child Services Interim Study Committee.

Also on Wednesday, the House voted 93-0 to approve Senate Bill 433 addressing abandoned property issues. The bill establishes a procedure to allow a county executive to dispose of certain properties that didn’t sell at a tax sale to a person who is able to repair and maintain the property. It also says that someone who enters or refuses to leave a vacant or abandoned property after having been barred from it by a court order or law enforcement officer commits criminal trespass. SB 433 was returned to the Senate with amendments. 

SB 285 regarding wavier of the right to remonstrate against annexation passed the House 93-0. It provides that if someone waives his or her right to remonstrate against an annexation as part of a contract with a municipality for providing sewer service to the property, then that release isn’t binding on a successor in title of the property under certain circumstances.  It also returns to the Senate after being amended.

The 2013 legislative session is scheduled to end April 29.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT